Suggestions/18th-Mar-2007

Closed Suggestions

1. These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
2. Suggestions with a rational Vote tally of 2/3 Keeps over total of Keeps, Kills, and Spams will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page by a moderator, unless the original author has re-suggested the Suggestion.
3. Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
4. All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
5. Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
6. Again, DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. It will be used as a historical record and will eventually be locked.

NT Syringe Change

Timestamp:	Labine50 MH|ME|'07 01:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Balance Change
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	It's been about one year since NT syringes cost 10 AP to use. Things have changed since then, so I would like to propose the following- take syringe use down to 5 AP, and the encumbrance up to 4%. Before you say- "Zombies were much worse off, and they got through without a really overpowered update!" Yes, but there were dozens of suggestions and an almost never ending barrage of complaints. Survivors will most likely do the same, (And it is heading in that direction...) so save yourself from having to go through it now.

Keep Votes

1. Author Keep --Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^'07 01:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
2. keep-- not keen on the encumberance part but syringe use does cost too much. It wasn't the cost of revives that unbalanced the game before it was that zeds were dull and survivors too good. rather than the encumberance i think that a nerf to find rates should be the balance.--Honestmistake 23:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
3. keep -- Not in any way game breaking. I gotta say, if you don't want to be revived, there is a skill for that. Revivifying should be expensive, but not as expensive as it is. I outright stopped reviving for quite a while because reviving became the only action I could do. --Ev933n / Talk _PPGC 11:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
4. Keep-- Pretty good... Should be skill.--revos windu 23:29, 1 april 2007 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes

1. Kill - Making a suggestion you know is too good just because you figure it's inevitable the Suggestions page will be flooded with ridiculous pro-survivor crap anyway? No. --Mold 01:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
   • Re - You misread that, I was saying that it will happen, but that's not why I'm suggesting this. You go skydiving because it's fun, you take a parachute so you won't be killed.--Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^'07 02:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Kill - Survivors kept zombies down under 40% for quite some time using 10AP syringes, and will get them back down to those numbers eventually. 8 revives in one day is to many. Wanna save some AP's on revives? Implement the RESCUE policy. --S.Wiers ^X:00_{x-mas tree dead pool} 02:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill - Kinda overpowered. Revivers like me don't need that. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 05:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

   Re - Not everybody works in Yagoton.--Matthew Celsius 16:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

   Yagoton is currently overrun with zombies, so it's not nearly as safe as you assume. Also, I didn't mean that, but that I consider reducing the AP necesary for a revive a cheap way to tip the game in favor to survivors: I rather have another, more innovative change than this one if I wish to balance the game. I guess I like to revive people in the current, harsh conditions! --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 09:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

4. Kill — More or less an overpowered dupe of my Syringe Proficiency Skill suggestion, but I won't dupe it, because it is different enough. --Anotherpongo 08:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
5. You need to change this before I vote keep. May I suggest the talk page? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 13:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

   Re - I guess your right, constructive criticism from 1 or 2 people is better than why the current system works fine for people in Yagoton from several.--Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^'07 16:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

6. Kill - using Revive AP as a balancing tool is actually one of the more difficult ones. It's easier to let Kevan tinker with behind the screen numbers as the barricading cost in AP, search rates of essentials. Easer to calibrate, less public so it incites less drama and more effective overall anyway. Simply not the best solution to something that isn't even a problem yet.--Vista 17:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
7. Kill - 10AP per revive works fine. -- 21:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
8. Kill - Syringes are fine as they are. Present a reason that they should be changed (other than that people will eventually start whining that they do), and I'll change my vote (but only if it's a good reason). --Saluton 23:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
9. Kill - What I hate about syringes is that they're basically a one-shot kill. You revive the zombie who's attacking you, and he's down before he reloads the page. With the 10AP limit, survivors can only combat revive five zombies max. at a time. Reduce the limit, and sieges will end up all about combat revives. --c138 ^{RR - PKer} 00:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
10. Kill - Same as above. This is unfair. Increasing the percent encumberance doesn't do squat but limit a player's range. A Combat Reviver could stock up to full and just rock and roll after letting his AP rebuild. The cost of knocking a zed down is purposefully high and therefore should be kept. --Bathe 01:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
11. Kill - 4 revives in one session sounds good to me. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 09:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
    

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. game breaking--Gage 11:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
2. spam - I don't know if it's game-breaking, but until I see the meta-results of the recent changes (ie until there are 12 survivors left, in a junkyard in Old Arkam) I don't think it's worth considering such a major change. --Funt Solo 13:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

---

Adrenaline

Timestamp:	Heretic144 02:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Civilian Skill
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Living on the edge tends to give some people a certain rush. When the brains and bullets are flying, their fatigue turns to brawn. Whenever a survivor with Adrenaline deals lethal damage to a zombie, (or maybe even another suvivor) they gain five AP. Mechanically speaking, this allows for a bit more in the way of battlefield heroics without creating killing machines. The new inventory restrictions mean that you can't create an endless loop of: Kill Z. Get five AP. Kill another Z. Get five AP. Instead, you can perhaps land a few more blows or run a bit further away or whatever.

Keep Votes
For Votes here

1. Author Keep--heretic144
2. Keep - Overpowered is a strange vote, since a powerful boost for survivors can always be implemented alongside an equivalent boost for zombies. While zergers/groups could use this, I doubt it'd be any use to them: it's likely an AP disadvantage in comparison to using the zergs directly. --Toejam 13:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes
Against Votes here

1. Kill - I still think it's too good. Especially combined with headshot, that's -5AP to enemies, +5 AP for self. And you can still carry 12 shotguns even with the new restriction. That's 24 shots of up to 65% chance to do 10 damage. If this gets implemented, you could even search a bit for ammo and then go out and shoot your whole barrel clean. Even then you might have extra AP to search & refill your shotguns. In fact, you probably will. This will just about make shooting shotguns AP self efficient. --Storyteller 03:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Kill As the spamvoters below. - BzAli 20:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill - Overpowered. -- 22:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill - I like the general concept, but it seems off. Something like a 1 AP or 2 AP gain instead of 5 AP, or limiting use of the skill to once per 24 hours, seems more realistic. Needs some revision is all.--Sedway Leighman 01:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
5. Kill/Dupe I think this has been suggested before. That is not why I am killing it. I think I suggested keep on the last one. The reason being: it had a limitation. Either 1-2 AP for Adrenaline with a percentage to fail, or make it an item... Coffee, Amphetamine, Syringe of Adrenaline... etc. --Ev933n / Talk _PPGC 11:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
6. Kill - First of all, why would this not be applied to zombies? They're the ones with the bloodlust, you know. And secondly, this would open up a big can of worms with people "AP farming" zombies (which would be an extremely easy thing to do, since zombies can't hide behind barricades like survivors can). Basically, it's just giving survivors who happen to have an excess of shotgun shells on them the ability to buy some more by shooting a zombie in the head, which doesn't really make sense. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 19:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
   

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Overpowered is an understatement. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 05:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
2. Spam — AP is regenerated by one point every half hour. This is a suggestion that almost changes fundamental game assumptions. Leave AP alone. This is horrificly overpowered. --Anotherpongo 08:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
3. spam - leave AP alone. By that, I mean you get 50AP per day, no more, no less. --Funt Solo 09:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
4. Dear god. No way.--Gage 11:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
5. As Funt. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 13:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
6. Spam - Zerger sets up 20+ zerg zombies in one place, has them all chomp each other down to 2 or less HP's. Zerger's main alt comes in, whacks them all with a maxed knife or zombie claws, for a net gain of 3 AP per zombie. Not that this is really the suggestions worst feature, but it is among the most ridiculous. --S.Wiers ^X:00_{x-mas tree dead pool} 14:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
7. Spam - Besides all the things already said. This rewards trenchcoaters and disenchants barricaders, healers and revivers. seeing that trenchcoaters already gain Xp more easily makes this exactly the wrong sort of mechanic to introduce in game balance terms.--Vista 17:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
8. Spam - Horray! A coordinated group could now give one of their members a (virtually) infinite amount of AP, limited only by group size/coordination. If this isn't the definition of spam, it should be. --Saluton 23:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
9. Spam -Uh, people, you don't seem to know what "lethal damage" is. If we assume that we use the D&D version of "lethal damgae", that means every time you hit someone, you gain five AP. A trenchcoater or PKer with, say, a maxed-out axe or knife- or even an unskilled knife- (actually, the knife might even be more useful...) could, if they could somehow stay online for the same amount of time, keep playing for ever. and ever. and ever. till the endgame comes and they die with no-one to reive them. --AlexanderRM 23:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC) hey, and could someone tell me why we use UTC? I con't even know what that stands for.

   UTC explained. --Vista 07:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

10. Spam - Don't want to see AP screwed up like this. And why provide even more incentive to combat, and as such, counter-incentive to other activities. Also, I can't understand why would this not also be applied to zombies, anyway? --Rgon 04:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
11. Bizarro Keep - This suggestion am much good! --Lord of the Pies 22:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

---